I'm flabbergasted. I suspect Obama will just laugh it off, but will he be allowed to? This behaviour is bizarre. I've seen it twice in the work place, just before the accuser went on extended sick leave.

The following 2 users would like to thank Blueangel for this useful post:

Can Trump make such allegations without there being repercussions? This is virtually an admission of guilt because he's implying that the info about Russian meetings is coming from a wire tap at Trump Towers.

I'm not sure how you construe that as confirmation that voting was probably rigged. It is a confirmation that it would be technically possible.

With any IT system, the first question is if it is an inside, or an outside job. In the case of the election system, then if it were an inside job, then there would have been so many people aware of it that someone would probably have spilled the beans. If it was an outside job, then either the vote counting system is hopelessly insecure, or a lot of people were ignoring indications that something odd was going on.

Hacking isn't really that difficult, the trick is to do it without causing alarm bells to go off.

__________________
If everyone you know agrees with you consistently, they are either not listening, or not capable of critical thought.

The following 3 users would like to thank JagWaugh for this useful post:

I'm not an IT peep but I am an elections peep. This is possible under controlled conditions, but very unlikely in live polling places with poll workers and voters standing around. Even less likely in places that have paper backup to the electronic system.

But that's not to say that people won't try. I always wondered why post-Bush/Gore people suddenly thought electronic machines would fix all the problems that punch cards had instead of bringing on their own set of issues.

Can Trump make such allegations without there being repercussions? This is virtually an admission of guilt because he's implying that the info about Russian meetings is coming from a wire tap at Trump Towers.

The federal judge, James Robart, who issued the broadest injunction against President Donald Trump's travel ban executive order seems irked by confusing statements from the White House and Justice Department lawyers about the replacement Trump has promised to issue.
The new order from the judge came in a separate, private class-action lawsuit filed by individuals in Washington state

Plaintiffs cite numerous contradictory statements by President Trump and others in his administration to the effect that they will continue to defend the Executive Order at issue in this litigation in addition to issuing a new Executive Order," wrote Robart. "

Trump has said he plans to continue to defend the original order in court, even though Justice Department lawyers asked the 9th Circuit to vacate its ruling in the case once a new order is issued.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer told reporters last month that Trump would not rescind the original order, although government attorneys have told the courts that it would be rescinded.

A spokesman for Barack Obama on Saturday rejected claims by U.S. President Donald Trump that the then-president had wiretapped Trump in October during the late stages of the presidential election campaign, saying it was "simply false."...

..."Neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any U.S. citizen. Any suggestion otherwise is simply false," Obama spokesman Kevin Lewis said in a statement...

...Lewis also said that "a cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice."
The statement did not address the possibility that a wiretap of the Trump campaign could have been ordered by Justice Department officials.

The White House did not respond to a request to elaborate on Trump's accusations.